Enter your email address
Submit
Write your message
Volume 13, Issue 4 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomic 2026)
Iran J Ergon 2026, 13(4): 318-327 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.UMSU.REC.1398.494
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rastgoo L, Allahyari A, Allahyari T. Sex Differences in Hand Anthropometric Dimensions, Grip Strength, and Manual Dexterity: A Study among Dental Students. Iran J Ergon 2026; 13 (4) :318-327
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-1125-en.html
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-1125-en.html
1- Department of Occupational Health, School of Health, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran
2- Faculty of Dentistry, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey
3- Department of Occupational Health, School of Health, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran ,allahyarit@yahoo.com
2- Faculty of Dentistry, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey
3- Department of Occupational Health, School of Health, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran ,
Abstract: (1551 Views)
Objectives: In the dental profession, hands play a fundamental role in performing precise, fine movements and controlling specialized instruments. Hand anthropometric dimensions, grip strength, and manual dexterity are key factors in designing appropriate ergonomic tools. Given the physiological and anatomical differences between the two sexes, this study aimed to investigate sex differences in hand anthropometric dimensions, grip strength, and manual dexterity among dental students.
Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study was conducted on 100 dental students (51 females and 49 males) at Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran. Hand anthropometric dimensions were measured using a digital caliper, maximum grip strength was assessed using a Jamar dynamometer, pinch grip strength was measured using a SAEHAN pinch gauge, and manual dexterity was evaluated using the Roeder test. Data were analyzed using SPSS software 24 and the independent t-test.
Results: The mean height and weight of male participants were 177.6 ± 4.52 cm and 77.8 ± 10.92 kg, respectively, while those of female participants were 162.5 ± 5.32 cm and 63.1 ± 8.12 kg, respectively. Most hand anthropometric dimensions (finger length, width, and circumference) were significantly greater in males than in females (P < 0.001). The mean maximum grip strength was 45.2 ± 8.3 kg in males and 26.8 ± 6.1 kg in females (P < 0.001). Significant differences were also observed between the two types of pinch grip strength (P < 0.01). Although the mean manual dexterity score was slightly higher in females (23.4 ± 3.2) than in males (22.6 ± 3.8), this difference was not significant (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: The findings demonstrated significant sex differences in hand anthropometric dimensions and grip strength; however, no significant difference was observed in manual dexterity between the two sexs. These results emphasize the need to design dental instruments tailored to the anthropometric characteristics of each sex to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorders.
Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study was conducted on 100 dental students (51 females and 49 males) at Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran. Hand anthropometric dimensions were measured using a digital caliper, maximum grip strength was assessed using a Jamar dynamometer, pinch grip strength was measured using a SAEHAN pinch gauge, and manual dexterity was evaluated using the Roeder test. Data were analyzed using SPSS software 24 and the independent t-test.
Results: The mean height and weight of male participants were 177.6 ± 4.52 cm and 77.8 ± 10.92 kg, respectively, while those of female participants were 162.5 ± 5.32 cm and 63.1 ± 8.12 kg, respectively. Most hand anthropometric dimensions (finger length, width, and circumference) were significantly greater in males than in females (P < 0.001). The mean maximum grip strength was 45.2 ± 8.3 kg in males and 26.8 ± 6.1 kg in females (P < 0.001). Significant differences were also observed between the two types of pinch grip strength (P < 0.01). Although the mean manual dexterity score was slightly higher in females (23.4 ± 3.2) than in males (22.6 ± 3.8), this difference was not significant (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: The findings demonstrated significant sex differences in hand anthropometric dimensions and grip strength; however, no significant difference was observed in manual dexterity between the two sexs. These results emphasize the need to design dental instruments tailored to the anthropometric characteristics of each sex to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorders.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Anthropometry
Received: 2025/11/16 | Accepted: 2026/01/3 | ePublished: 2026/01/2
Received: 2025/11/16 | Accepted: 2026/01/3 | ePublished: 2026/01/2
References
1. Hayes M, Cockrell D, Smith D. A systematic review of musculoskeletal disorders among dental professionals. Int J Dent Hyg. 2009;7(3):159-65. [PubMed]
2. Kamal A, Ahmed D, Habib S, Al-Mohareb R. Ergonomics of preclinical dental students and potential musculoskeletal disorders. J Dent Educ. 2020;84(12):1438-46. [DOI:10.1002/jdd.12369] [PMID]
3. Meenakshi S, Raghunath N, Muralidhar N. Work related musculoskeletal disorders among general dental practitioners of Mysore district, Karnataka-a questionnaire survey. Int J Health Sci Res. 2014;4(10):131-41.
4. Anton D. Dental hygienists at risk for CTS [Internet]. Ergoweb; 2002 [cited 2026 Jan 7].
5. Căminișteanu F, Vorovenci A, Perieanu VȘ, Petri SA, Burlibașa L, David M, et al. Occupational diseases among dental personnel: a scoping review. J Med Life. 2025 Jun;18(6):526-35.
6. Singh S, Sharma N, Jain SK, Sharma S. An ergonomics study on hand parameters for intuitive controls and better precision. South East Eur J Public Health. 2025:1-8.
7. Nasl Saraji J, Hosseini M, Shahtaheri S, Golbabaei F, Ghasemkhani M. Evaluation of ergonomic postures of dental professions by Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA), in Birjand, Iran. J Dent Med-tums. 2005;18(1):61-7.
8. Iordache C, Fătu AM, Chirieac R, Ancuța C. Work-related hand pathology among dentists: A pilot study. Pathology. 2016;9(10):11.
9. Fayez ES. Neck pain and hand grip strength in dentists of Saudi Arabia. Int J Innov Appl Stud. 2014;9(2):655-61.
10. Abe T, Counts BR, Barnett BE, Dankel SJ, Lee K, Loenneke JP. Associations between handgrip strength and ultrasound measured muscle thickness of the hand and forearm in young men and women. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015;41:2125 30. [DOI:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.04.004] [PMID]
11. Patel DPK. Ergonomics and dentistry: a brief review. MAR Dent Sci. 2021;2(3):1‑10.
12. Salam FA, Chinnakalai T. Relationship of grip and pinch strength to body mass index among dental professionals-cross sectional study. Int J Curr Res Rev. 2016;8(21):29.
13. Dargahi H, Nasl Saraji J, Sadr J, Sadri G. Ergonomics in dentistry. J Dent Med-tums. 2010;22(4):199-207.
14. Allahyari T, Jafari S, Khalkhali H. Measuring power hand grip strength in a sample of students aged 19-36 in Urmia. Iran J Ergon. 2015;3(3):44-50.
15. Angst F, Drerup S, Werle S, Herren DB, Simmen BR, Goldhahn J. Prediction of grip and key pinch strength in 978 healthy subjects. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010;11(1):94. [DOI:10.1186/1471-2474-11-94] [PMID]
16. Nayak US, Queiroga JM. Pinch grip, power grip and wrist twisting strengths of healthy older adults. Gerontechnology. 2004;3(2):77-88. [DOI:10.4017/gt.2004.03.02.003.00]
17. Ahern S, Rys MJ. Evaluation of dental scalers. Ind Syst Eng Rev. 2013;1(2). [DOI:10.37266/ISER.2013v1i1.pp40-50]
18. Ozkan NF, Gokalp-Yavuz F. Effects of dexterity level and hand anthropometric dimensions on smartphone users' satisfaction. Mob Inf Syst. 2015;(3):1-9. [DOI:10.1155/2015/649374]
19. Taft S. Hand function evaluation for dental hygiene students. Electron Theses Dissert. East Tennessee State University. 2014.
20. Saremi M, Rostamzadeh S, Nasr Esfahani M. Hand functionality in dentists: The effect of anthropometric dimensions and specialty. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2022;28(3):1473-81. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2021.1904626] [PMID]
21. Çakıt E, Durgun B, Cetik O. Assessing the relationship between hand dimensions and manual dexterity performance for Turkish dental students. Adv Intell Syst Comput. 2016;489:469-479. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-41694-6_47]
22. ISO 15535:2012. General requirements for establishing anthropometric databases [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2026 Jan 7].
23. Fess EE. Grip strength. In: Casanova JS, editor. Clinical assessment recommendations. 2nd ed. Chicago: American Society of Hand Therapists; 1992.
24. Tiffin J, Asher E. The Purdue Pegboard: norms and studies of reliability and validity. J Appl Psychol. 2008;32(3):234-47. [DOI:10.1037/h0061266] [PMID]
25. Hashemi Nezhad N, Choobineh A, Haghdoust AA, Mohammadian M. Comparison of grip and pinch strengths of adults among five cities of Iran. J Sch Public Health Inst Public Health Res. 2014;11(3):65-81.
26. Taghizade M, Mohebbi I, Khalkhali H, Ahmadi-Arablu P, Torfeh A, Hajaghazadeh M. The study of anthropometric dimensions of hand in office staff in Urmia. Iran J Ergon. 2018;6(1):1-10. [DOI:10.30699/jergon.6.1.1]
27. Chuan TK, Hartono M, Kumar N. Anthropometry of the Singaporean and Indonesian populations. Int J Ind Ergon. 2010;40(6):757-66. [DOI:10.1016/j.ergon.2010.05.001]
28. Massy-Westropp N, Gill T, Taylor A. Hand grip strength: Age and gender stratified normative data in a population-based study. BMC Res Notes. 2011;4:127. [DOI:10.1186/1756-0500-4-127] [PMID]
29. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Oberg B. Intra- and inter-tester reliability and reference values for hand strength. J Rehabil Med. 2001;33(1):36-41. [DOI:10.1080/165019701300006524] [PMID]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Copyright Policy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
